RAJ KUMARI MISRA Vs. D.D.C. PRATAPGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Akhtar Abbas, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State. None has appeared for the private opposite parties to contest and argue the matter though a learned counsel had filed vakalatnama.

(2.) Though, this writ petition was filed in 1985 the impugned order passed by the D.D.C. was never stayed instead an interim order was passed on 25.04.1988 restraining the opposite parties from cutting the trees existing on the land in dispute. As noted in the order dated 13.11.2019 the lower Court records pertaining to the case at hand had already been weeded out on 01.06.1995 as informed by learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel on the basis of written instructions which are on record.

(3.) In brief, the facts of the case are that Bhagauti Deen, Parmeshwar Deen and Sukhdeo were three brothers. The dispute in this case pertains to Khata No. 34 comprising of Gata No. 4/1 measuring 12-6-02 on which it is said that a grove was existing when the consolidation operations started. At the start of consolidation operations i.e. in the basic year Khatanui, sons of Bhagauti Deen and Sukhdeo were recorded. The sons of other brother Parmeshwar Deen, whose legal representatives are the petitioners before this Court, filed objections claiming co-tenancy. It is not in dispute that the said grove land had come down to Bhagauti Deen from one Shikora, his alleged maternal grand mother. Prior to on set of consolidation operation a Suit under Section 229 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act, 1950') was filed by the sons of Sukhdeo wherein the sons of Parmeshwar Deen and Bhagauti Deen were also arrayed as defendants but the sons of Parmeshwar Deen for some reason could not or did not contest the matter inspite of publication of notice to them and ultimately the suit was decided on the basis of compromise between the sons of Sukhdeo and the sons of Bhagauti Deen who took half share each of the said land. It is said that the sons of Parmeshwar Deen filed an application for restoration of suit proceeding which was rejected by the Judicial Officer on 15.05.1971 i.e. after commencement of the consolidation operations.